Seven months have passed since an appeals court said that Erick Howard — a former Hoover High School football standout — must be resentenced on his rape and aggravated robbery convictions.

But first, the trial judge must decide whether Howard gets a new trial — a common request when convictions are appealed, but rarely granted. A hearing related to that defense motion is scheduled for Monday in the courtroom of Stark County Common Pleas Court Judge Taryn Heath.

The resentencing — ordered by an appeals court — involves a technical issue that will likely not reduce Howard's 30-year prison sentence.

However, in addition to the technical issue, the majority opinion of the three judge-panel said the sentence appeared like Howard was punished for not accepting a plea deal for a 12-year term.

The prosecution has said that was not the case, noting that new evidence emerged at trial and that Howard did not express remorse.

In February 2012, Howard — Ohio's two-time Mr. Football — was found guilty on the robbery and rape charges as well as aggravated burglary and kidnapping.

The case centers around an incident on Aug. 20, 2011, when a man and woman were held at gunpoint and bound with duct tape by two masked men at their North Canton home. The female victim was sexually assaulted.

The request for a new trial was filed in April. The court filing centers on a letter that a codefendant in the case, Seth Obermiller, sent to Howard.

According to the defense, the letter suggests that Obermiller's testimony against Howard was untruthful. Obermiller, 21, of Lake Township, pleaded guilty to taking part in the home invasion and robbery. He was sentenced to seven years in prison.

If Heath rules against Howard's request, she can schedule the resentencing the 5th District Court of Appeals deemed necessary. The panel said Heath should have merged the kidnapping charge with the other counts, which she had sentenced separately but did not add prison time.

The defense and the prosecution both appealed the 5th District ruling to the Ohio Supreme Court, but the high court decided not to hear either challenge.

The resentencing is delayed until the appeals are resolved and the request for a new trial is heard.